Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

Yeah, the plan is to re-word the rule so that it doesn't give as much monarchical but still allows us to do that.

My big post..page 3 or 4, I think.

I don't like that idea.
We ARE monarchy.
WE ARE SPARTA!
*self face palm*

A less literal interpretation would be nice, but I don't know about the rewording.

An email to JoeyDay is probably in order here before anything else happens.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Could you mention that we'd like him to appoint someone from this community to more comprehensive admin duties at the level of Stu, Dot com, and them? I had a really long PM, but I guess he doesn't get email notification of his PMs, and then stuff moved so fast I had to delete it because it was out of date. Or I'll email him, whatever.

_________________
ATTN: LOWER BOARD USERS HAVE MOVED TO ANOTHER FORUM. COME JOIN THE FUN!

Sree, the majority of people want Rule one reworded. Nobody likes the idea of the Mods and Admins getting to throw their weight around for no reason, and Rule one gives them the right to do just that.

Yes, but what happens when every other admin becomes all butthurt and complains?

_________________

Idea for the warning system:

One thread in the Mod Forum specifically for tracking warnings. Whenever you warn someone, whether it be through the forum or a PM, post in that thread:

-username- : -# of warnings-

The number of allowed warnings is up to you, although I think a three strike system would suffice.

Then let them complain to me. I should have every right as they do, amirite?

_________________

But you'll end up in a back alley with no legs and frostbite!

_________________

The idea I proposed was a whole new board in which each user would have a thread where their specific offenses would be recorded. We'd be able to very easily see everything we'd need to know about a specific use to know what consequence they should receive if they commit an offense.

And that board would be locked to everyone but Modmins?

I like, I like..

EDIT: it should be public to view, tho.

I guess that could work. We tried to think of a way to use a single thread, but couldn't figure out anything that wouldn't be extremely messy to keep track of. Your idea would still be a little difficult to find previous problems with a person if it's buried among lots of other warning reports -- but maybe it could work.

The hold up with all that is that we figured the only way to do it would be to create a whole new hidden section just for individual threads about warnings to individual users. Either that or upgrade to phpBB3, which has stuff that could be used as an integrated warning tracker.

_________________
ATTN: LOWER BOARD USERS HAVE MOVED TO ANOTHER FORUM. COME JOIN THE FUN!

Basically, yes.

_________________

Yeah. Don't see why it shouldn't be public to view. It'd be good if users could keep track of their warnings as well.

Because there are somethings that we like to keep secret. We don't want to be realizing everything to everyone. If we make a post saying "Hey that one gut, Bubu, I matched his IP to whoever" then I'd be basically letting him know that we're onto him and he can go and change his IP/e-mail/whatever he's gotta do.

_________________

I don't think we've been abusing that right, though. I think it's mainly a problem because people are making it one. Even if we establish limitations on our powers, it wouldn't change anything because nothing would force us to abide by our own rules. There'd be no Congress or Supreme Court to check our Executive Branch. Rule 1 is currently worded the way it is because we thought there was no point in skirting that issue. (At least I presume. I wasn't there when it was written.) So even if we reword Rule 1 or basically remove it from the rules, it's still going to be there, really.

Really, rule 1 boils down to, "Apply common sense. If it violates common sense, even without violating the rules explicitly established here, it's still against the rules." The point is that the legal wrangling that may work in the court system doesn't work here. You might prefer a different wording, but in the end, what you'll get is the same thing.

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

If you guys let people know how many warnings they have, it's fine. Hah, and BuBu ain't me. Techincally.

Kef, no, there are plenty of instances where it has happened. Please don't try to pretend it hasn't. And even if it hasn't (which it has), it could happen in the future unless something is done about it. We're not saying that Rule One should be gone completely, we're saying that it's got to be rewritten, or else the Modmins can do whatever they please and get away with it.

I've actually gotta agree with Kef. I haven't seen it used since the other mods and I were promoted (I can think of one minor time, but it was linked to another rule anyway, so it was only half rule 1). This re-wording is pretty much going to be what we've already been doing.

There are many small instances that go un-noticed (probably because they happen to me, ha ha). However, it'd be nice if it were changed to not give you guys the opportunity to be like that.

Heres a question: Is the offense list of every user going to be wiped clean once we get a system designed and implemented?

_________________

For example? I asked for specific examples earlier before and, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think any were provided.

I can imagine legitimate arguments that the rules haven't been applied consistently or something like that, but I haven't seen anything that I'd consider primarily an abuse of rule 1.

- Kef

_________________
404 sig not found

We should probably wait until we can actually make the system to answer more specific questions like that, 'cause it's hard to say.



(In response to Kef as well) I think a lot of these are due to miscommunications. it's possible that small things were backed up with rule 1, but for the most part, we always had another rule to back up our actions. Unfortunately, this was not always well communicated, so no one really knew what exactly was backing up the actions. I can see why, in that case, you'd have to assume it's rule 1. (Again, though, it's possible that we did use rule 1 for small things like that occasionally. I don't remember any instances, but that doesn't mean there weren't any)

Again, though, what may or may not have happened prior to this doesn't really matter anymore, other than using it to shape our new guides and guideliens. So whether or not rule 1 was misused is a moot point now.

They're small things, that go overlooked. I can't give you any specific examples (COLA might be able to, but that's him). I know that before, Rule one has been abused in very small instances. Even the attitude of some mods are bad because of Rule One's presence.

But that doesn't matter - it still needs to be changed. Because even if nothing's happened before, it can happen if Rule One's still there. We want to rule out that possibility altogether.

EDIT: Now, for all of you who are arguing that it just says "use common sense", here's the rule:



Why shouldn't our vote count? Why are the admins and mods always right? That's unfair to the userbase and just plain ridiculous. True, mods and admins need some authority, but not so much that users are ruled out altogether. And it gives mods and admins way too much power.

The common sense part, well, that's a part of it, but that's not just what the rule boils down to.

EDIT: What Ju Ju said about moot points. That.

Edit By Ju: Merged your two posts together

I obviously haven't read that rule in a while, 'cause it's a lot more "trump card-ish" than I remember. I see what you mean.

Yeah, exactly.

Thanks for the merge, by the way.

I don't know if it got lost in the purge or buried under suggestions, but I remember either bringing up the idea or taking part in a discussion about it. Basically from what I can remember was that we had a series of threads all called something along the lines of TROLL ALERT that would purposefully be left to fall down into the dark pages. Then, whenever a trolling occured, someone would bump it with the name of the troll and perhaps where he was posting. Then users would see the bump and know where to avoid, or even just get off the forum for a while until the dust settled.

Is that right, or were you talking about a different one that would make me look like a doofus, rammy? ^^;;

Edit: upon reading more it looks like maybe not. *shrug* Hey, it still could be a good idea. We haven't had any bad trollings in a while, but who knows. It could still be a good way to alert the common user about a nasty attack (flagstaff, anyone?) in addition to getting the modmin's attention through the normal means.

_________________

No, by warning system, Rusty's talking about warnings given to users when they break a rule. He wants it to be mroe structured so that users can be assured that they'll be warned about their behaivor before more drastic action is taken. Ram's talking about finding the discussion of it buried somewhere in this thread.

Good memory, though, I forgot all about that thing.

Hehe, thanks on both ^^;;

I shall now resume getting caught up in this and homeworks before additional posting. I do have some input in all of this, but I want to make sure it's not already been said.

_________________

At the top is my warning system suggestion, at the bottom is one more thing I wanted to bring up. I'm still seeing a few people going for the deletion of RT. Well, they need to realize that when Drama happens, it's the people that make Drama that cause it, not the existence of RT. RT just so happens to be the thread where it's taken most often. It could be Feeling, it could be anything. But it's not RT's fault that drama happens, so if we restrain ourselves, RT will have no need for deletion.

Didds...Do you see this? This is what I wanted.

_________________